Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Andreas W. Ketcham et al., Appellants, v. Henry Newman et al., Respondents, 1900 — 164 N.Y. 584 · caselaw · US
General
Andreas W. Ketcham et al., Appellants, v. Henry Newman et al., Respondents
164 N.Y. 584·New York Court of Appeals·1900·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Andreas W. Ketcham et al., Appellants, v. Henry Newman et al., Respondents.
Ketcham v. Newman, 42 App. Div. 621, appeal dismissed.
(Submitted October 15, 1900;
decided October 23, 1900.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of .the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered September 6,1899, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at Special Term.
The motion was made upon the ground that the appeal was not taken within one year after the final judgment was entered, and it should, therefore, be dismissed under section 1325 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Gordon M. Buck for motion.
No one opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs.